Political analysts say tussle over Pa. party chair could hurt Dems

Katie McGinty speaks on stage during the final debate among the democratic gubernatorial candidates vying for the chance to challenge incumbent Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Corbett in the November election at Drexel University's Mandell Theater in Philadelphia on May 12, 2014.

We are currently undergoing updates to our site and are working to improve your experience on all devices that you use throughout your day. If you should find a page or a story that is not working correctly, please click here.

Thank you for your patience,

TribLIVE.com Team

HARRISBURG — Pennsylvania Democrats can ill afford an internal squabble as party Chairman Jim Burn pledges to fight a challenge from Katie McGinty, who is gubernatorial nominee Tom Wolf's choice to head the organization, political analysts say.

“One of the things the Democrats don't need is infighting in their ranks,” said Steve Peterson, professor of political science at Penn State Harrisburg.

“It seems to be creating unnecessary turmoil in the party” as Wolf tries to unseat Republican Gov. Tom Corbett, said Jack Treadway, a retired political science professor from Kutztown State University. There's a longstanding tradition that the person winning the primary for governor gets to name the party chairman, Treadway said.

Burn's supporters say he bucked that tradition in 2010 and stayed on.

Wolf last week chose McGinty, former top environmental regulator under Gov. Ed Rendell and the last-place finisher in the four-way May 20 primary, as the person he wants to be the face of the Democratic Party. He also proposed Rep. Jake Wheatley of the Hill District as party vice chair.

McGinty “is an incredible choice. She complements Tom Wolf in terms of being an incredibly fresh face,” said Sen. Vincent Hughes of Philadelphia, an early supporter of McGinty for party chair.

Wolf, a York businessman who ran as an outsider, served in Rendell's cabinet as revenue secretary.

Burn, a Millvale attorney, did not consent to an interview.

“The issue for the committee to decide this Saturday is whether the party picks its leadership from the top down or the bottom up,” Burn said in an email to the Trib. “I will support whatever decision the state committee members make in that regard.”

Wolf told committee members in an email he knows he needs “a battle-tested team in place to take on Tom Corbett, build the party and elect Democrats up and down the ballot.”

J. Wesley Leckrone, a political science professor at Widener University, said it seems likely the matter will be settled before the Democratic State Committee meets.

“This is the chance for the state committee to extend an olive branch and offer support for Wolf,” said Larry Ceisler, a media consultant from Philadelphia with Democratic ties. McGinty of Chester County “is an inspirational figure,” Ceisler said.

Nancy Mills, chairwoman of the Allegheny County Democratic Committee, said Wolf carried the county “by an absolutely overwhelming margin” and won all 67 counties in Pennsylvania. She said Burn should step aside, even though he's done a good job as chairman.

But Frank Rosenhoover, a retired teacher and union representative from Altoona, said he is backing Burn. “You don't throw the captain of the ship overboard because you have different passengers,” he said.

Jack Hanna, an Indiana County attorney, said, “I've never seen a chairman of the Democratic Party work as diligently with as much leadership as Jim Burn.”

Brad Bumsted is state Capitol reporter for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at 717-787-1405 and bbumsted@tribweb.com.

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our
Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent
via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.